I am planning to do some thinking about the view that all of creation is sacramental so I have noted this comment from Calvin:
… if they simply understand “sign” as what is adduced for a comparison… what end or measure will there be? There is nothing that by this reasoning will not be a sacrament. There will be as many sacraments as there are parables and similitudes in Scripture…. I admit that whenever we see a vine, it is a very good thing to recall that Christ said: “I am the vine, you are the branches”; “My Father is the vinedresser”. Whenever we meet a shepherd with his flock, it is good that this also come to mind: “I am the good shepherd”; “My sheep hear my voice”. But anyone who would classify such similitudes with the sacraments ought to be sent to a mental hospital.
(Institutes 4.19.34, FB ed. p1481-2)
Posts
15 comments:
...anyone who classifies such similitudes as sacraments ought to be sent to a mental hospital.
Shall we make a list?
Right. Starting with Revd Lloyd?
Matthew, Matthew, Matthew. Never Revd Lloyd, please! Revd Mr Lloyd or Revd M Lloyd, of course. :)
Okay, broken record: but it does all depend on what one means by sacramental.
I think too often we imagine all the similitudes of Scripture are just random illustrations whereas we ought to think of them as really significant correspondances which are hard-wired into creation.
So, Calvin was the Mark Driscoll of his day evidently.
Yeah sure, creation intended to reveal God to us, so that we have vines (and lions, and eagles, and salt) so that they could be used the way they are in the bible, which is really something about what they actually 'mean'. Great stuff. Is that what a sacrament is?
Is there a corresponding temptation to the one you outline (we think similitudes are random illustration), that of so broadening our definition of 'sacrament' that we damage/weaken the significance of baptism and the Lord's supper.
No doubt when u write something on it there'll be all sorts of juicy, necessary, scholarly, biblical distinctions, nuances and clarifications. Bring it on I say.
Yes, Pete. I agree with you. Hopefully it will! I need to do much more reading and thinking about what people mean when they say all of creation is sacramental.
I wonder whether we might say that if creation is generally sacramental (in some sense, like it is a created thing which God has established to mediate the divine to us / speak to us of him - in a direction pointed to by Through New Eyes, for example) then there can still be special dominical sacraments of the church / gospel.
I think Calvin has some openness to saying that ordination is sacramental, although not commanded for all believers.
O'Donnovan has also suggested I believe that things like the Lord's Day are sacramental, but I wont blither on now.
If we're going to be pedantic: THE Revd Mr Lloyd. Revd should never be used without the definite article (Crockford's).
Ah, but Crockford's should never be refenced without a glass of sherry in hand, Neil.
Ros, were you assuming that Neil didn't have a glass of gnat pee in his hand?
At 4.58pm? A little early for sherry, wouldn't you think, Matthen?
I'm afraid sherry was one of the stereotypical features of Oxford life that didn't agree with me!
Ah ha. :) I should have known better than to try to correct The Revd Prof Mr M Mason [with can of Cafrey's close at hand].
I can do without sherry too.
No, Ros. Parish ministry is hard.
Or should I say 'Ron'?
Marc,
I think you should finish your doctorate before you consider Professor in your title. And by then you'll be a Canon.
It is so much easier being a Presbyterian.
I certainly wasn't thinking of styling myself Prof.
But waiting for anything till I've finished the PhD sounds too long. I shall probably be retired by then so maybe Emeritus is the thing to go for. :)
Post a Comment